In a significant legal development, the High Court of Kerala has stepped in to address a case involving alleged violations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and other related laws. The petitioner, Chandra Mouli, sought the intervention of the court to challenge the proceedings of the Fast Track Special Court (POCSO) in Thrissur.
On May 27, 2024, Justice K. Babu delivered a comprehensive judgment, meticulously analyzing the legal intricacies and citing relevant precedents. The central issue revolved around the petitioner's request to obtain a certified copy of the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C).
Representing the petitioner, advocates Sri Renjith B Marar and Lakshmi N. Kaimal argued passionately for the accused’s right to access crucial legal documents without unnecessary barriers. They backed their arguments with statutory provisions and Supreme Court rulings, notably referencing the landmark cases of Sakshi v. Union of India and Nipun Saxena v. Union of India.
Justice K. Babu, in his detailed judgment, stated, "A lawyer appearing for a party in a proceeding is an officer of the Court. He is always expected to discharge his duties and responsibilities legally." He stressed that issuing directives based on unfounded fears that a lawyer might act unlawfully interferes with the right to practice law.
The judgment delved into the legal framework surrounding victim protection and the ethical duties of legal professionals. Justice K. Babu highlighted the constitutional right to practice any profession under Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution and the regulations set forth by the Advocates' Act.
Citing specific passages from the Supreme Court judgments in Sakshi v. Union of India and Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, Justice K. Babu emphasized the protective measures in place to safeguard victims of sexual offenses. He reiterated the Supreme Court's stringent guidelines to prevent the disclosure of victims' identities, underscoring the importance of these protections in the legal process.
The judgment not only addressed the petitioner’s concerns but also reinforced the principles that uphold the integrity of legal practice and the protection of vulnerable individuals in the judicial system.
To get free legal advice:https://www.advotalks.com/
For More Legal Updates visit our youtube channel
.jpeg&w=80&h=80&crop-to-fit)
